Trending Topics:

Jewish worshipers seeking access to Haram al Sharif could trigger next intifada, Tibi says

Israel/Palestine
on 71 Comments

Dome of the Rock mosque with Israeli security guards in the foreground.

The increasing number of right-wing Jews who are praying at the Haram al Sharif or the Temple Mount, as it is known to Jews and the politicians who support them, are creating tensions that could ignite a third intifada.

In an early November article (behind paywall) in Ha’aretz titled “Heightened Jewish Activism on Temple Mount May Spark Widespread Conflict,” Amos Harel and Nir Hasson wrote about the volatile situation created by a movement among right-wing Jews to change the status quo on the al Aqsa esplanade.

Though few Israelis are aware of it, tensions around the Temple Mount are surging. Since the January general election, right-wing and religious groups have stepped up their efforts to change the status quo between Jews and Muslims at this ultra-sensitive site − a development due in no small measure to the growing clout of Habayit Hayehudi [The Jewish Home party] in the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. A variety of initiatives, some of which might be considered bizarre and dangerous, is getting next to no coverage in the mainstream Israeli media. However, the other side − the Palestinians, the Islamic Movement in Israel, even the neighboring Arab states − is watching the events on the mount with increasing concern.

In the past, Temple Mount activists were considered a fringe element who sought to damage the al Aqsa and Dome of the Rock mosques and advocated the rebuilding the Jewish temple.  Today the most prominent and dangerous activism concerns the Jewish right to pray on the esplanade, which is banned according to an agreement reached with the Jordanian custodians shortly after the 1967 War.

Currently, the activists are people more acceptable to the Israeli establishment and who have their own powerful lobby in the Israeli Knesset.

[T]he Temple Mount for the first time has an active and significant political lobby. MKs and ministers who are pressing for a change in the ongoing situation there include Miri Regev ‏(Likud‏) who, as chairwoman of the Interior Committee, has already convened several meetings on the subject; Housing Minister Uri Ariel ‏(Habayit Hayehudi‏); Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin ‏(Likud‏); and Moshe Feiglin ‏(Likud‏), who visits the mount regularly and has been detained there by police on several occasions. Also active are deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon ‏(Likud‏), and MKs Shuli Moalem and Ayelet Shaked ‏(both from Habayit Hayehudi‏).

The Ha’aretz article mentioned an impending Knesset Interior Committee meeting to discuss legislation which would allow prayer on the Temple Mount.  The Times of Israel covered that meeting, at which Palestinian and Jewish MPs participated in an angry shouting match. A four-minute video included with the article shows  a security guard appearing to threaten to physically remove Palestinian MP Ahmed Tibi, who, with other Palestinian legislators, eventually walked out of the meeting.

Tibi, who is the MP who appears at the start of the clip, repeatedly called the Chairperson, Miri Regev, a “pyromaniac,” referring to the conflagration that could happen as a result of Jews praying on the Temple Mount.  Standing at the exit, he reminded the Jewish parliamentarians that “the Second Intifada broke out because of al Aqsa [referring to Sharon’s visit there in 2000], and because of you [the third] will break out because of al Aqsa.”

As this site mentioned recently, the Israelis appealed to the Jordanians to allow Jewish prayer on the esplanade.  The request was rejected.  The post details a New York City gathering of settlers and their supporters last Sunday that focused upon gaining Jewish sovereignty over the mosque esplanade.

According to Harel and Hasson, the Israeli authorities enforce the prayer ban because they fear violent Palestinian protests.  They claim that PM Benjamin Netanyahu does not approve of Jews praying on the esplanade.  However, according to Annie Robbins’ September post, the violent actions of the Israeli security forces were aimed at assisting a large group of Jews to mount a provocative action on the esplanade during the Sukkot holiday.

Proposals for allowing Jewish prayer range from permitting small groups to worship there, to dividing the esplanade into two equal parts, one Jewish and the other Muslim.  All proposals are seen by the Muslim authorities as an extremely provocative attempt to assert Israeli sovereignty over the holy site, a goal to which many of the Jewish activists openly admit.

Here is an uncritical and supportive interview with Yehuda Glick in The Forward.  Glick is an  American Israeli lawyer, who is a prominent Temple Mount prayer activist.  According to Harel and Hasson, Glick misstates that the Israeli Supreme Court held that Jews had the right to pray on the esplanade.  The journalists claim that the court ruled that the Israeli security services should determine whether Jewish prayer should be permitted.

On Tuesday the Washington Post ran this article about the prayer activists in its On Faith section.

Ira Glunts
About Ira Glunts

Ira Glunts is a retired college librarian who lives in Madison, NY. His twitter handle is @abushalom

Other posts by .


Posted In:

71 Responses

  1. Mike_Konrad
    Mike_Konrad
    November 20, 2013, 11:29 am

    Why shouldn’t Jews be allowed to pray in their sacred space?

    They have as much as claim to the space as the Muslims.

    Mohammed died 5 years before Islam ever got to Jerusalem. So there was no furthest (al-Aqsa) Mosque for him to visit.

    The Jews have, at least, as equal a claim as the Muslims, even better.

    • Sycamores
      Sycamores
      November 20, 2013, 12:54 pm

      simply solution for extremist Jewish zealots who want to pray on Muslim holy sites – all they have to do is convert to Islam. problem solved. these extremists are akin in nature to neo-nazis in their behaviour of stirring up trouble. hopefully these extremists are in the front lines when/if trouble does appear. but more likely they will coward behind the idf.

    • JohnAdamTurnbull
      JohnAdamTurnbull
      November 20, 2013, 1:10 pm

      Spiritual claims are always equal because they defy measurement.

      What can be measured is access. Jews can travel freely to the site while Muslims cannot.

    • talknic
      talknic
      November 20, 2013, 1:14 pm

      @ Mike_Konrad “Why shouldn’t Jews be allowed to pray in their sacred space?”

      1) A Mosque? 2) Civilians of the Jewish state, be they Jewish or non-Jewish, have no right to be in “territories occupied”

      “They have as much as claim to the space as the Muslims”

      1) A mosque? 2) Civilians of the Jewish state, be they Jewish or non-Jewish, have no right to be in “territories occupied”

      “Mohammed died 5 years before Islam ever got to Jerusalem. So there was no furthest (al-Aqsa) Mosque for him to visit”

      So what? Jerusalem wasn’t within the territory recognized as the Jewish state ASKED to be recognized http://www.trumanlibrary.org/whistlestop/study_collections/israel/large/documents/newPDF/49.pdf and the Jewish state has never legally acquired any territory beyond its recognized borders http://pages.citebite.com/y1f0t4q1v4son

      “The Jews have, at least, as equal a claim as the Muslims, even better”

      To a Mosque in “territory outside ” http://pages.citebite.com/x1r0b4d1y6mkv the Jewish state?

      Seems you’ve lost the plot.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      November 20, 2013, 1:34 pm

      “Why shouldn’t Jews be allowed to pray in their sacred space?”

      Because it’s not theirs. It’s the Muslims. And since the zionists have demonstrated over the last 100+ years that they have no intention of any just “sharing” when it comes to Palestine or any part of it, the Muslims are fully justified in closing it off to non-Muslims.

      The Jews have the Western Wall. Go pray there.

      “They have as much as claim to the space as the Muslims.”

      No, they don’t. It’s belonged to the Muslims for far longer than it belonged to the Jews.

      “Mohammed died 5 years before Islam ever got to Jerusalem. So there was no furthest (al-Aqsa) Mosque for him to visit.”

      Wrong. The Night Journey brought Mohammad to al-Quds, as it sets out in the Quran.

      “The Jews have, at least, as equal a claim as the Muslims, even better.”

      Nope. They don’t. It’s been Muslim property for over a millenium. No claim by the Jews comes anywhere close.

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 20, 2013, 2:10 pm

        @Woody:

        “The Night Journey brought Mohammad to al-Quds, as it sets out in the Quran”

        If I am not wrong, the Quran doesn’t say the night journey of the Prophet was to Jerusalem (Al-Quds). Here is the phrase from Surat Al-Issra:
        “Exalted is He who took His Servant by night from al-Masjid al-Haram to al-Masjid al-Aqsa, whose surroundings We have blessed, to show him of Our signs. Indeed, He is the Hearing, the Seeing”

        There are several Ahadith say that the night journey ended in Jerusalem. One of them is the Hadith of Sahih Al-Bukhari. Here is the first paragraph:
        “It is narrated on the authority of Anas b. Malik that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: I was brought al-Buraq Who is an animal white and long, larger than a donkey but smaller than a mule, who would place his hoof a distance equal to the range of version. I mounted it and came to the Temple (Bait Maqdis in Jerusalem), then tethered it to the ring used by the prophets”
        http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?book=001&translator=2&start=300&number=0309

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 20, 2013, 3:34 pm

        MahaneYehude1,

        It says so right there, where you quoted, “…to al-Masjid al-Aqsa…” Does it explicitly say that this is in al-Quds? No. Does it need to? No. Why not? Because it’s merely a term that needs to be interpreted and the Hadiths are the accepted tool for interpretation.

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 20, 2013, 4:29 pm

        @Woody:

        The term “Al-Aqsa” means “The farthest” (Hebrew: Katze), so the Quran says that the prophet journey was to “the farthest mosque”. Later interpretations of this phrase claim that Muhammad rode his winged horse, Al-Buraq, to the Al-Aqsa in Jerusalem. Several Ahadith were written because political and other motives, for instance, to glorify and sanctify specific place or to sanctify a particular practice. Whether the specific Ahadith about the prophet journey to Jerusalem were written because any different motives – I don’t know.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 20, 2013, 5:54 pm

        Wow, you completely missed the point, didn’t you?

        First, yes, we all know what al-Aqsa means. (And who cares what the Hebrew word is? It’s irrelevant.) Second, the Quran specifies a place and calls it al-Masjid al-Aqsa. So you are wrong to say that it’s not in the Quran. It is. And further, Mohammad identified this place specifically as in al-Quds, as recorded in the hadith. Case closed.

        “Several Ahadith were written because political and other motives, for instance, to glorify and sanctify specific place or to sanctify a particular practice.”

        Irrelevancy. They are accepted by the Muslim community as being the proper tool to interpret the Quran, and purport to record the words of Mohammad detailing the Night Journey.

        “Whether the specific Ahadith about the prophet journey to Jerusalem were written because any different motives – I don’t know.”

        What makes you think you are in a position to have an opinion on this point, at all??? For over a millenium, the Muslim interpretation of their holy book has been clear. It’s not for you to express any opinion on it, in this context.

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 20, 2013, 11:26 pm

        @Woody:

        First, I think I didn’t miss any point. If you believe in the Hadith says that Al-Aqsa is in Al-Quds and if you believe the Prophet specify the place in Al-Quds – I respect your beliefs. In the past I had a long debate with several people here about the history of the Jewish people, and I claimed that what is important to me is the people memories, whether the story is real or mythology. So, I expect others to respect our beliefs too and if Jerusalem or Rachel Tomb are regarded holy places for Jews, we must respect them too. Please, read the following comment:
        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/09/j-street-is-quick-to-pounce-on-nyt-piece-shrugging-off-end-of-jewish-state.html#comment-594162

        Here is the important part of my former comment:

        “Ecru, please, let me give you the same example that I wrote earlier. Muslims believe that, during his night journey, the prophet Mohammad arrived from Mecca to Jerusalem riding on his winged-horse Al-Buraq. They built the Al-Aqsa mosque in the same place he arrived. The mosque is considered the third holy place in Islam and Jerusalem as Holy city (Al-Quds – The Holy). I will never, never!!, ask a Muslim whether he believes the story. For him it is a truth and I respect it. Each people in our planet has stories which are combinations of true historic facts and beliefs, so do the Jewish people. For centuries Jews believe that Israel is their homeland which they left. They expressed their fillings in daily prayers, in their ancient festivals, in songs and Piyutim (don’t know the word in English), in daily blessings, traditional costumes (breaking glass in wedding) and more. Several of them came to this land to visit and in some cases to be buried. So, all the attempts to cut the connection between us and the land of Israel will not succeed as well as the attempts of several right-wings Jews to cut the connection of the Palestinians from Palestine will never succeed (and it is disgust me). It is very hard to suppress hundreds or thousands years of beliefs even not with historic facts (which soon debunked by others, and the circle never ends). As I respect the Muslims beliefs, tradition and history, I ask you to respect our, whatever the books you read say.”

      • kayq
        kayq
        November 21, 2013, 1:47 am

        Mahane, Muhammad (pbuh) later confirmed this was Jerusalem before he died.

      • Walid
        Walid
        November 21, 2013, 3:28 am

        “Muhammad (pbuh) later confirmed this was Jerusalem before he died.” kayk.

        Hi kayk, where is that written?

      • seafoid
        seafoid
        November 21, 2013, 4:26 am

        “For centuries Jews believe that Israel is their homeland which they left. They expressed their fillings in daily prayers, in their ancient festivals, in songs and Piyutim (don’t know the word in English), in daily blessings, traditional costumes (breaking glass in wedding) and more. ”

        The Brits have been singing about a new Jerusalem for centuries, buddy.
        Does the city also belong to them?

      • Ecru
        Ecru
        November 21, 2013, 5:52 am

        Added to which seafoid for centuries the people of Connacht believed ourselves to be the descendants of the Fir Bolg. So all you johnny come lately Milesians can just pack your bags and sod off back to Spain And while we’re at it – the Brits can go back to Troy in Turkey.

        Begs the question where the Spanish will go though doesn’t it. Maybe the Rift Valley?

        Myth ≠ Land Claim

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        November 21, 2013, 6:05 am

        “For centuries Jews believe that Israel is their homeland which they left. ”

        What do you mean by “homeland”?

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        November 21, 2013, 6:31 am

        Ecru, we were all created by Izanagi anyway, except for the Japanese, who are all descendants of Amaterasu and therefore more divine than the rest of us. (She Who Must Be Obeyed reminds me of this fact from time to time.)

      • eljay
        eljay
        November 21, 2013, 7:49 am

        >> For centuries Jews believe that Israel is their homeland which they left. They expressed their fillings in daily prayers, in their ancient festivals, in songs and Piyutim … , in daily blessings, traditional costumes … and more.

        Beliefs, prayers, festivals, songs, blessings and traditional costumes did not give people of the Jewish faith, citizens of countries around the world, the right to commit terrorism and ethnic cleansing, or to establish an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist “Jewish State” in Palestine.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 21, 2013, 9:30 am

        MY1,

        Yes, you did miss the point. Because the point is not whether I believe it or you believe it, but whether the Muslims believe it and why they believe it. And this is not merely a call for “respecting” someone’s belief. You must accept the fact that the Muslims believe it, and you must accept their method of reaching that belief, even if you don’t believe in the validity of those methods. (Because the precise issue is: their religious beliefs. And guess what? Neither you nor I get a vote on that issue. Only they do. [As an analogy, some Jews say that Shabbat elevators or lamps and such do not violate the mitzvot concerning the Sabbath. I can come up with great arguments as to why they do violate those mitzvot, but guess what? I don’t get a vote on the matter. I have to accept that this is what these Jews believe and why the believe it, even if I disagree with their reasoning and method.])

        And you demonstrate that you miss this point, in as much as you claim that the attempts by some Jews to sever the connection between the Palestinians from Palestine disgusts you, but one of the primary ways that this is accomplished is by doing what you’ve done here: made the false claim that al-Quds is not mentioned in the Quran, with the stated or unstated assertion that, therefore, the denomination of al-Quds as the third holiest place in Islam is fraudulent. (See, e.g., Mike Konrad’s barbaric comment on this thread, to see it in action.)

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 21, 2013, 11:37 am

        @Woody:

        I read my comment again and again and I didn’t see that I wrote such thing. I wrote specifically about the phrase from Surat Al-Issra, then I read your clarification. I accept the fact that Jerusalem is the third holiest city to Islam, whatever the reasons are and I wrote about it in several of my former comments. One of the comment I sent you as a link.

        I agree with you and think that I should write “if the Muslims believe” instead “If you believe”, but I think this is was my primary meaning.

        I wrote my opinion very clearly in my first comment in this thread. Here is the paragraph from my first comment again:

        “Many Jewish rabbis oppose visits by Jews on the Temple Mount (From religious reasons). I also think that these visits should not be made until we sign peace agreement which let worshipers from all faiths visit their holy places”

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 21, 2013, 11:49 am

        @RoHa:

        “What do you mean by “homeland”?”

        Exactly what a Palestinian means when he says “Watan”.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 21, 2013, 12:51 pm

        “I read my comment again and again and I didn’t see that I wrote such thing.”

        Yes, you wrote:

        “If I am not wrong, the Quran doesn’t say the night journey of the Prophet was to Jerusalem (Al-Quds). Here is the phrase from Surat Al-Issra:”

        I reread my post and the part about the claim of fraud was poorly worded. I’m not saying that you are claiming it is fraudulent, I’m saying that the denial you make (i.e. claiming that Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran when it actually is) is used by those Jews who are trying to cut the connection between Palestinians and Palestine to claim fraud. That’s why you are missing the point.

        “I also think that these visits should not be made until we sign peace agreement which let worshipers from all faiths visit their holy places”

        Since this land is Muslim property, shouldn’t it be up to them to decide whether to permit it? Who says it will be in any final agreement that anything other than Muslim worship will occur there?

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        November 21, 2013, 7:01 pm

        “Exactly what a Palestinian means when he says “Watan”.”

        Which is …?

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 22, 2013, 4:57 am

        @Woody:

        Again, I didn’t use the argument, only said that in the Al-Issra phrase that I quoted, Jerusalem doesn’t mentioned. I know that several people use the argument as you wrote (“claiming that Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran”) but I am not among them. For me personally, what is important is not a phrase or document or coin, but the common memory of the people. If more than billions Muslims declare Jerusalem is a holy city for them – I respect their declaration. In the same time I do expect other people respect our common memories: If the western wall and Tomb of Rachel, for instance, are regarded holy by the Jews, so I think they must be respected by other people.

        “Since this land is Muslim property, shouldn’t it be up to them to decide whether to permit it? Who says it will be in any final agreement that anything other than Muslim worship will occur there?”

        Peace agreement is a mutual agreement. When peace agreement will be signed, Muslims and Christian-Palestinians could visits their holy places inside Israel and Israeli-Jews could visits their holy places inside the independent state of Palestine. “Visit” means only visit, not claims over the places exactly as I can visit the Prague’s Synagogue but I have no claim on it and I recognize the synagogue belongs to Czech Republic.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 22, 2013, 10:23 am

        “I didn’t use the argument”

        There’s no other point to raising in a discussion of the desecration of al-Haram ash-Sharif if you’re not.

        “only said that in the Al-Issra phrase that I quoted, Jerusalem doesn’t mentioned.”

        And, again, it is. The place is clearly mentioned, even if the city name is not. Your argument is like saying that a sentence: “I went to the top of the Empire State Building” doesn’t mention New York. In both cases, the place is mentioned, even if any particular label is not.

        “I know that several people use the argument as you wrote (‘claiming that Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran’) but I am not among them.”

        That’s exactly the gist of what you wrote: “the Quran doesn’t say the night journey of the Prophet was to Jerusalem (Al-Quds).” Unless you have some bizarre form of Tourette’s Syndrome where you compulsively spit out religious trivia, there’s no reason to write the sentence you did if you were not claiming that Jerusalem is not mentioned in the Quran or trying to undermine the Muslim claim to their holy place.

        “For me personally, what is important is not a phrase or document or coin, but the common memory of the people. ”

        Poetic nonsense. There’s no such thing as a “common memory.” There’s cultural history, and that’s made of up of the phrases and coins and documents you discount. But it’s interesting that you put “cultural memory” on such a high pedestal, but then only claim that the Jews have it, while the Muslims only have a “declaration.”

        “‘Visit’ means only visit, not claims over the places ”

        And Jews can visit now, they just can’t hold religious services. And really, do you honestly think that the israelis are going to agree in a treaty to give up all claims to al-Haram ash-Sharif? No. They aren’t. And if they aren’t, then any reasonable Muslim will see any attempt at access beyond that which exists today as merely the next step toward the expulsion of the Muslims, the destruction of their al-Haram ash-Sharif. So why would they agree to anything more than that only Muslim worship will occur there? Because you want it?

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 22, 2013, 11:26 am

        Woody;

        “Unless you have some bizarre form of Tourette’s Syndrome where you compulsively spit out religious trivia…”

        Woody, it is unfair. I thought we have fair discussion and understanding but I see you try to put words in my mouth. Indeed, I quoted a phrase from the Surat Al-Issra, but I also quoted several Ahadith, not only in response to you but also in other threads. If you think it is only “religious trivia” I have nothing to say about it.

        “But it’s interesting that you put “cultural memory” on such a high pedestal, but then only claim that the Jews have it, while the Muslims only have a “declaration.” ”

        No, Woody, I didn’t say only Jews have memories, but all including Muslims. I also gave the example of the importance of Jerusalem among the Muslims. I thought that I wrote a comment that we both can agree. If this is not enough, I have nothing more to add.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 22, 2013, 2:05 pm

        “Woody, it is unfair. ”

        No, it’s not unfair at all. YOU are the one who made the statement “the Quran doesn’t say the night journey of the Prophet was to Jerusalem (Al-Quds)” in a thread started by Mike Konrad’s Islamophobic comments about the Night Journey. If you have a valid reason for the statement you made, an excuse for writing it here, in this thread, then explain yourself. In the absence of that, we can only conclude that you join in Konrad’s Islamophobia and illegitimate attempts to delegitimize the Muslim connection to, ownership of, and sovereignty over, al-Haram ash-Sharif.

        “No, Woody, I didn’t say only Jews have memories, but all including Muslims.”

        It doesn’t appear so to me. You mention “common memories of a people” and proceed to discuss Muslim “declarations followed by Jewish “common memories.” (after asserting that such “common memories” are more important than such things as “phrases”, which would naturally encompass “declarations” would it not?)

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 24, 2013, 3:20 am

        @Woody:

        Look, I don’t understand why you do a lot of efforts to depict me as an Islamophobe that want to delegitimize the Muslim connection to, ownership of, and sovereignty over, al-Haram ash-Sharif, as you wrote. You also ignore the many comments I wrote here about the importance of Jerusalem to Muslims. I don’t have to prove nothing: my many comments and my statement in my first comment are the best proofs against your false argument. Again, what is important for me are the memories and beliefs – If Jerusalem is regarded holy place for millions of Muslims, it is enough and I don’t think it is right to delegitamize this connection as well as it is not right to delegitimize the connection of the Jewish people and Jerusalem.

        Woody, I assume, and I hope I am not wrong, that it is hard to you to imagine that a pro-Israeli, Zionist commenter like me, supports the Muslims claim over Jerusalem. You always say “You wrote so and so…”, but, please, be honest enough and admit that the only person cited the Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith about the arrival of the Prophet to Jerusalem in his night journey, was me, the Israeli Jew, pro-Israeli, Zionist commenter in MW. Show me other Hasbarist, as you call me, cite the Al-Bukhari’s Hadith.

        For the last time, Woody, please, stop to depict me as an Islamophobe. This insult me a lot.

        About the word “declaration”, please, accept my apologies. Sometimes, due to my English, I am not aware to such things. Again, when I say “common memories” I don’t mean of the Jews only but all peoples on this planet.

        Now, after all my comments and many clarifications, would you agree with me that several places on this tiny land are regarded holy for the Jews also? Would you agree that Jews can visit, after peace agreement, their holy places and pray there freely if they want?

      • kayq
        kayq
        November 24, 2013, 11:33 am

        I believe it was in a Hadith.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 24, 2013, 4:20 pm

        MY1,
        First, if you don’t want to come across as an Islamaphobe, then perhaps you should stop ducking the real issue: As I noted on a number of posts so far, you made an assertion regarding the Quran which is often asserted by those looking to delegitimize the Muslim claims. In fact, I can see no reason why you would have made that comment – in this particular thread, following Mike Konrad’s statement — if you were not trying to further the insidious claim delegitimizing Muslim rights. Because the issue isn’t the hadith and it isn’t about whatever other statements you made. The issue is about the denialism that you demonstrated, claiming that Jerusalem was mentioned in the Quran when it clearly is. perhaps there is an explanation for your inclusion of that statement. If so, you would do well to explain yourself. In the absence of such an explanation, one can only conclude what one concludes.

        “Would you agree that Jews can visit, after peace agreement, their holy places and pray there freely if they want?”

        No. The property belongs to the Muslim waqf and they have sovereignty over it and have full ownership over it. If they would like the Jews to be permitted to pray that is up to them however, if they would like to limit prayer to Muslims only than that is also their right.

        Uness you are willing to leave it to them to decide what happens with their property, then you are, in effect, stealing their property rights from them. Does a Christian have a right to demand that the Turkish government permit Christian services at Hagia Sophia? Do the Muslims have the right to demand Muslim worship at Cathedral of Córdoba? No. Of course not. The same here.

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 24, 2013, 11:37 pm

        @Woody:

        Now I sure I didn’t miss any point. I recognize the Muslims holy places but you can’t recognize our holy places.

        I think I explained my self many times and I don’t have nothing to add just let you know that I stand behind all my comments and arguments.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 25, 2013, 10:35 am

        “Now I sure I didn’t miss any point”

        The fact that you claim to be sure is more evidence that you missed the point.

        “I recognize the Muslims holy places but you can’t recognize our holy places. ”

        Oh, quit trying to play the victim. I recognize that the Jews consider this place holy. I also recognize that the property belongs to the Muslims and is under their soverignty. It simply doesn’t follow that the fact that Jews consider it to be holy means that the Jews have a right to visit, to pray or do anything else with that property or are entitled to dictate to the Muslims what will be done on the Muslim’s property. It’s up to the Muslims. If they decide to permit non-Muslim prayer there, that’s their right. Likewise, if they decide to limit prayer to Muslim prayer there, that’s also their right.

        “I think I explained my self many times”

        No, you didn’t. At no point, even after being invited to do so on a number of occassions, did you explain why you would post a false comment, which is often made by those seeking to destroy the Muslim presence on al-Haram ash-Sharif, in a thread where another poster is making that exact claim and talking with approval about destroying al-Aqsa mosque. Nowhere. So we are left to our own conclusions as to why you would refuse to explain yourself.

    • Hostage
      Hostage
      November 20, 2013, 9:52 pm

      Why shouldn’t Jews be allowed to pray in their sacred space?

      Israel is merely an occupying power and there is no compelling military necessity for it to happen. Israel signed an armistice agreement with Jordan under the auspices of Chapter 7 UN resolutions that are still in effect which accepted Jordan’s competence and territorial jurisdiction pending a final settlement.

      The boundary established by the Israel-Jordan peace treaty was without prejudice to the status of the territory that came under IDF control in 1967. So, it is a violation of the armistice agreements, the Geneva Conventions, and the UN Charter for Israel to unilaterally try to assert jurisdiction; engage in assaults on buildings dedicated to religion or historical monuments; to engage in pillage, plunder, or spoilage of any state or private property located in the occupied territory; or to even permit civilians to cross the armistice lines.

      The Muslim shrines that have been located there for centuries and the Zionist have never demonstrated that praying on the supposed site of the Temple is in any way obligatory. In fact it has always been the Orthodox Rabbinate that has prohibited Jews from desecrating the site.

    • ziusudra
      ziusudra
      November 21, 2013, 11:34 am

      Greetings Mike_K.,
      ……Mohammed died 5 yrs before Islam ever got to Jerusalem….
      Pssst Bubala,
      the Wooden structure of the Al Aqsa Mosque goes up in 622AD,
      by the 2nd Caliph Omar.
      Mohammed lives till 632AD.
      The Stone structure went up 70 yrs later by the 10th Caliph Abu Malik,
      in 692AD.
      The Mosque gets rebuilt in 746AD after an Earthquack.
      Pssst Bubala,
      The Islamic conquest extends from 636AD- 1200AD.
      The puny amounts of Judaists that hadn’t already left for Greece & Rome
      from 200BC to 636AD on certainly left at such time.
      The area was inhabited solely by the Semite Arabs 636AD till 1948AD.
      ziusudra
      PS That wall that is being used as the Wailing Wall is probably the remains
      of a Roman Fortress. They could just as well pray to a turtle or a bycicle.
      Neither the remains of David,’s Palace nor the conjectual 2 Temples have ever
      been proven!

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 21, 2013, 12:39 pm

        @Ziusudra:

        “They could just as well pray to a turtle or a bycicle”

        Thank you very much for your recommendation.

  2. eljay
    eljay
    November 20, 2013, 12:51 pm

    1. Jews and Muslims should spend less time being idolatrous worrying about where to pray to their gods and just pray to their gods.

    2. Tear it all down and convert the space into a nice park for everyone to enjoy in the free city-state of Jerusalem. :-)

    • Erasmus
      Erasmus
      November 20, 2013, 1:57 pm

      @ eljay
      Tear it all down and …..

      With Reference to your :-), it seems,eljay, that you did not really mean what you suggest here.
      Whatever, permit me to say, that “jesting” (?) in this context i can only consider utterly misplaced. :-(

      • eljay
        eljay
        November 20, 2013, 2:16 pm

        >> With Reference to your :-), it seems,eljay, that you did not really mean what you suggest here.

        Actually, I did mean it. The smiley-face represents the resulting happiness. :-)

      • eljay
        eljay
        November 20, 2013, 2:34 pm

        If tearing everything down sounds too harsh, how about this:
        2.i) Dismantle the entire site and group everything into distinct Jewish and Muslim components.
        ii) Move the components to new, undisputed Jewish and Muslim sites, respectively, and re-assemble them there.
        iii) Convert the former site into a nice park for everyone to enjoy in the free city-state of Jerusalem. :-)

      • Erasmus
        Erasmus
        November 20, 2013, 2:59 pm

        great improvement of your original plan!
        Congrats.

    • Stephen Shenfield
      Stephen Shenfield
      November 20, 2013, 8:39 pm

      Or a swimming pool perhaps? In Soviet times there was a swimming pool on the site in Moscow that used to be — and is now again — occupied by the Cathedral of Christ the Savior. Although it was in the open air, the water was heated so you could swim there even in winter. Anyway, winter is much milder in Jerusalem.

      I checked with the Almighty and He assured me that He doesn’t mind people praying to Him quietly while strolling in a park or swimming. But He doesn’t like it when people use the semblance of prayer to engage in their petty internecine squabbles. He doesn’t listen to “prayers” of that kind. He just shuts the prayer transmitter off.

  3. MahaneYehude1
    MahaneYehude1
    November 20, 2013, 12:56 pm

    “Haram al Sharif or the Temple Mount, as it is known to Jews…”

    There are some clues in Islam that the area was the Jewish Temple Mount. Ka’eb Al-Akhbar was a Jewish rabbi converted to Islam and one of the Tabi‘in. Ka’eb Al-Akhbar was with Khalif Umar Ibn Al-Khattab when he entered Jerusalem. It is believed that Ka’eb pointed the Khalif Umar the place of the Temple Mount:

    “When Umar started to make repairs on the Bayt al-Maqdis, Temple Mount, from the trash which the Romans buried it in, Umar heard the takbir, God is Greater, announced from behind him. Umar was averse to evil do anything of showy false piety. He said: What is this? They replied: Ka’eb said God is Greater and people repeated after him. Umar said: Bring him here. Ka’eb said: O Amir al-Mu’minin, a prophet foretold of what you did today five hundred years ago. He asked: How is that? He replied: The Romans attacked Banu Israel (The people of Israel) and buried it (Bayt al-Maqdis), till you were appointed a ruler, when Allah delegated a prophet over the sweepings who said: O Jerusalem, I have good tidings for you, al-Faruq, has come to cleanse you of that which inside you”
    http://www.alsadiqin.org/en/index.php?title=Yakub_of_Syria_(Ka'b_al-Ahbar)_Last_Jewish_Attempt_at_Islamic_Leadership

    In addition, there are Palestinian family names like Makdisi and Makdasi (Also Jewish names, especially Iraqi Jews). I don’t know whether these names have any connection to Bayt Al-Maqdis (Bet Hamikdash) in Jerusalem or they are just names composed from the Arabic and Hebrew root k.d.sh (Holy).

    Many Jewish rabbis oppose visits by Jews on the Temple Mount (From religious reasons). I also think that these visits should not be made until we sign peace agreement which let worshipers from all faiths visit their holy places.

    • Walid
      Walid
      November 20, 2013, 3:54 pm

      Mahane, what you wrote is a romanticized version of Caliph Umar’s visit to Jerusalem. When he entered Jerusalem to accept its surrender, the actual location contained a small Christian church over which Umar decided to build a wooden mosque that could receive 3000 people. Another small structure was built over a big stone that someone told Umar was the site where the prophet Muhammad had ascended to heaven and where today you have the golden-domed mosque. Mu’awiya and his son Yazid (if you remember from the story of Ashura) were in Jerusalem at the same time as Umar, Mu’awiya being the governor of Syria at that time and hadn’t yet usurped the Caliphate. It was much later when Mu’awiya declared himself Caliph that actual serious work on the reconstruction began because Mu’awiya wanted to have an imposing holy city for his own Ummayad empire to compete with Mecca and Medina.

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        November 20, 2013, 4:50 pm

        @Walid:

        Thanks for the information. I also believe that many stories and Ahadith were aimed to romanticized events and were written from many different reasons like sanctify a place or to give religious authorization to a particular practice (not only in Islam, but in all religions including Judaism). Maybe the story about Ka’eb Al-Akhbar is one of them and was written to sanctify the Temple mount place to Islam. In the ancient world, new rulers used to destroy the holy places of the conquered peoples or make them saints to their religion (Just see the reason why the Jews celebrate Hannukah or see the ruin of Angkor, Cambodia) and I think the stories were part of this practice.

  4. Shuki
    Shuki
    November 20, 2013, 1:18 pm

    Tibi threatens, I mean “warns”, of rioting and increased terrorism, I mean “intifada”, unless Jews stop worshiping at the Temple Mount.
    ***
    And the Jews are the religious zealots?

    Thank you, Ira, for illustrating the hypocrisy and barely (if at all) veiled bigotry guised
    as criticism of Zionism.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      November 20, 2013, 1:44 pm

      If there is any bigotry here, it is your comment. Tibi’s not threatening, he’s warning. If the Jews continue to threaten to steal al-Haram ash-Sharif from its rightful owners, how would you expect them to react? The Jews have the Western Wall. Go pray there.

      • Walid
        Walid
        November 20, 2013, 3:12 pm

        Woody, even the Western Wall is dubious; archaeological data says it’s part of the Roman fort “Antonia”. Israelis keep insisting erroneously that the Temple Mount is exactly where Haram al-Sharif is located. All archaeological studies prove that they’re off by a few hundred feet to the south-east. I remember reading somewhere a few years back that the Jews’claim that the geographical location of Temple Mount being where the Haram is located is only from 100 or 150 years ago. So, it’s a relatively recent interest that they have in the Haram.

        Here’s an intro from one such analysis from a Canadian Bible group:

        “The Temple in Jerusalem was not located over the Dome of the Rock:

        Solomon built the temple on the threshing floor David bought. The Dome of the rock is the highest point of the temple mount. Threshing floors were never built on hills, but in curved valleys, like directly under the Al Kas Fountain. Under the dome of the Rock, was where the Fortress of Antonia stood. In 135 AD, Hadrian filled in about 50 feet of earth over top of where the temple stood and enlarged the temple mount and built a temple of Jupiter where we see the Dome of the rock today. In 325 AD Contanstine tore down the Temple of Jupiter and assumed Hadrian built the temple of Jupiter on top of the spot where the temple of Solomon once stood. Constantine built an octagon church on the site. In 700 AD the Muslims found the foundations of Constanine’s octagon church and built the dome of the Rock we see today.”

        http://www.bible.ca/archeology/bible-archeology-jerusalem-temple-mount-dome-of-rock.htm

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 20, 2013, 3:56 pm

        Walid,

        The world’s Jewish Community accepts the Western Wall as being the location of the Temple Mount. (And I think that the notion that this has only been viewed as the site of the Temple for 100-150 years is very wrong, given the historical writings dating back to the Roman times.) The issue isn’t the truth value of the claims (likewise for the Muslim beliefs about the Night Journey), but about what should be permitted in light of those claims.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        November 20, 2013, 8:09 pm

        ‘even the Western Wall is dubious; archaeological data says it’s part of the Roman fort “Antonia”. ‘

        Italian claim to Jerusalem?

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        November 20, 2013, 10:33 pm

        (And I think that the notion that this has only been viewed as the site of the Temple for 100-150 years is very wrong, given the historical writings dating back to the Roman times.)

        There are really no Jewish historical writings that identify the site of the Temple before the middle ages. In orther words, hundreds of years after any of the eye witnesses were long dead. Israeli archaeologists have demonstrated that the Wall was built after the era of Herod based upon the presence of coins from latter periods found underneath it.

        The proposed site doesn’t really correspond to the accounts written by Josephus and the structure isn’t shown on the Madaba map of the historical monuments of the City of Jerusalem. So there are logically competing theories about locations other than the Dome of the Rock, e.g. The Strange Story of the False Wailing Wall http://askelm.com/temple/t000701.htm

      • Mayhem
        Mayhem
        November 21, 2013, 8:14 am

        @Hostage, the newspaper article I read that refers to the discovery of
        coins at the site of the Western Wall mentions the date of the coins
        being after the death of Herod. Yet we know construction would have
        continued after Herod’s death and the temple was not actually
        destroyed until 75 years later.

        Furthermore the article says about the Western Wall, “It has been a
        site for Jewish prayer and pilgrimage for centuries, the earliest
        source mentioning Jewish attachment to the site dating from the 4th
        century
        .”

        Refer to http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2065254/Coins-Jerusalems-Western-Wall-hints-sacred-site-older-Herod.html

        Notwithstanding hypothetical alternative theories the common consensus is that the Muslims had the effrontery to build a mosque on top of the ruins of the Second Temple. It is not hard to understand why religious Jews don’t want to be dhimmis any more.

        Islamic religious triumphalism/supremacy is the root of the problem and could provide a convenient pretext for staging another intifada.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        November 21, 2013, 9:33 am

        Furthermore the article says about the Western Wall, “It has been a
        site for Jewish prayer and pilgrimage for centuries, the earliest
        source mentioning Jewish attachment to the site dating from the 4th
        century.”

        The Mishnah merely talks about the site of the former Temple. But it doesn’t do so in sufficient detail to determine where it was located. So there is no evidence that it was talking about the site of the so-called Western Wall where Jews pray today.

        Yet we know construction would have continued after Herod’s death and the temple was not actually destroyed until 75 years later.

        The article states that this is the first discovery that might confirm one small detail of the account written by Josephus. So, no one knew anything for certain before this discovery – and they still don’t know how long those coins were buried there before the wall in question was built over top of them. In addition, the theory that Haram al Sharif was the site of the Roman Fortress comes from the details contained in the account written by Josephus that it was much higher, and looked-out over the Temple Mount. The Fortress was large enough to serve as the camp for an entire Roman Legion. There are many other details of his account that are difficult to reconcile with this wall being the Western Wall of the Temple.

        Notwithstanding hypothetical alternative theories the common consensus is that the Muslims had the effrontery to build a mosque on top of the ruins of the Second Temple.

        In this case that’s really only a popular conceit, backed by inconclusive evidence.

  5. Erasmus
    Erasmus
    November 20, 2013, 1:45 pm

    Provocations today – see also Provocations 1929

    There are striking parallels not only to the process (Sharon) that triggered off the Al Aqsa intifada, but also to the developments which eventually culminated /triggered off the 1929 riots / Pogrom and killings, also known as Western Wall Uprising.

    The principle being: continuous provocations, sometimes small, but persistent to stretch and violate any agreed status quo.

    Palestinians have a profound sense for history and past experiences.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Palestine_riots

    • ritzl
      ritzl
      November 20, 2013, 2:50 pm

      Yep. Splitting stuff up didn’t work out so well for Palestinians in 1947-8.

      From Ira’s article:

      Proposals for allowing Jewish prayer range from permitting small groups to worship there, to dividing the esplanade into two equal parts, one Jewish and the other Muslim. All proposals are seen by the Muslim authorities as an extremely provocative attempt to assert Israeli sovereignty over the holy site, a goal to which many of the Jewish activists openly admit.

      Israel’s seemingly innocuous and [self-] righteous “sharing” appears to be an ongoing assimilation strategy.

  6. Walid
    Walid
    November 20, 2013, 2:43 pm

    “… the Israelis appealed to the Jordanians to allow Jewish prayer on the esplanade. The request was rejected….”

    It isn’t any wonder that King Abdullah II refused. In 1951, his great grandfather, King Abdullah, while visiting the Haram al-Sharif to pray was assasinated by a Palestinian from the Husseini clan because of his cozy dealings with the Zionists and for having been the only Arab country to actually accept the proposed partition of Palestine. King Abdullah II’s father, Hussein then aged 15 was also shot that day in 1951 but survived to later become King Hussein. So it’s very understandable that Jordan, with 75% of its population being Palestinian would refuse such a request having to do with the Haram al-Sharif.

  7. Mike_Konrad
    Mike_Konrad
    November 20, 2013, 4:58 pm

    The fact remains there was no furthest (al-Aqsa) Mosque in Jerusalem in Mohammed’s lifetime. He could not visit what was NOT there at the time.

    In reality, a biographer of Mohammed, in the eighth century showed that the furthest Mosque was a Mosque outside Mecca (in the suburbs) where Mohammed when to pray when he wanted to be alone.

    http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3596681,00.html

    The second difficulty is that Islamic tradition tells us that al-Aqsa mosque is near Mecca on the Arabian Peninsula. This was unequivocally stated in “Kitab al-Maghazi,” a book by the Muslim historian and geographer al-Waqidi. According to al-Waqidi, there were two “masjeds” (places of prayer) in al-Gi’irranah, a village between Mecca and Ta’if – one was “the closer mosque” (al-masjid al-adna) and the other was “the further mosque” (al-masjid al-aqsa,) and Muhammad would pray there when he went out of town.

    Al Gi’irranah is the farthest Mosque.

    I can agree that Israel is sometimes unnecessarily harsh with the Palestinians; but there are still some incontrovertible facts.

    One of them is: The Muslim claim to Jerusalem’s sacred spaces is a fraud.

    In practical terms:

    I disagree with Israeli demolition of Palestinian houses; but I would not disagree with an Israeli demolition of Al-Aqsa.

    • Ira Glunts
      Ira Glunts
      November 20, 2013, 5:32 pm

      Mike Konrad, You are a pyromaniac!!!!!!

    • miriam6
      miriam6
      November 20, 2013, 6:15 pm

      Stiff-necked Mike_Konrad @;

      I disagree with Israeli demolition of Palestinian houses; but I would not disagree with an Israeli demolition of Al-Aqsa.

      Oh stiff-necked one – don’t you ever think you are giving a bad name to those Jews who just want to pray peacefully on the Temple Mount?

      Does that thought ever cross your mind? Also you are not Israeli so why do you want to stir up trouble for Israeli Jews by talking about demolishing mosques?

      Why not re-build the Temple elsewhere in West Jerusalem?

      Thirdly are you actually secretly in the pay of those seeking to discredit Israel by coming across as the ultimate Zionist?

      The way you go on it certainly seems like it..

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 20, 2013, 6:26 pm

        “Oh stiff-necked one – don’t you ever think you are giving a bad name to those Jews who just want to pray peacefully on the Temple Mount?”

        Sorry, mariam, Mike Konrad just puts into words what these “Jews who just want to pray peacefully” really want and are really planning. His comments shine a light on those people and give lie to this “peaceful prayer” charade. Let them pray at al-Aqsa and they’ll be destroying the place in no time. Which is why the Muslims MUST be given the absolute right to exclude anyone who they wish at any time from al-Haram ash-Sharif.

      • miriam6
        miriam6
        November 20, 2013, 8:09 pm

        [email protected];

        Sorry, miriam, Mike Konrad just puts into words what these “Jews who just want to pray peacefully” really want and are really planning. His comments shine a light on those people and give lie to this “peaceful prayer” charade.

        Sorry to blow your theory out of the water but..

        Fifteen thousand religious Jews visited the Temple Mount in 2012, up from 9,000 in 2011. Ninety percent of religious Jews in Israel think they should have the right to pray on the Temple Mount, and a majority of the Israeli public agrees with them.

        http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/11/18/they-re-here-they-re-investable-get-used-to-it.html

        So fifteen thousand Jews visited the Temple Mount in 2012 and six thousand visited the site the year before and no harm was done to the mosque.

        Luckily the crazed stiff- necked one is not an Israeli and is not representative of most Israelis.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        November 21, 2013, 9:00 am

        “So fifteen thousand Jews visited the Temple Mount in 2012 and six thousand visited the site the year before and no harm was done to the mosque.”

        Nonsense.

        First, there absolutely is harm in not being permitted to exclude those you wish to exclude from your own property. The Jews have the Western Wall. Let them go pray there.

        Second, there the fact that these people didn’t destroy the mosque does not mean that, given the choice, they would not choose to do so. I have no doubt that a large percentage of that 90% would be happy to destroy al Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock, just like they liquidated the Moroccan quarter. There is, and always has been, a very strong barbaric streak among the israelis concerning this point, and the only thing that has prevented this grave crime is the rare cool head among the occupation leaders.

        And as history is any guide, these Jews won’t be happy with merely being able to pray there. They’re going to want to build, then they’re going to want to control Muslims’ access and then they’re going to destroy the Muslims’ presence and make it a Jewish-only site. This has been their pattern for over 100 years in Palestine.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      November 20, 2013, 6:17 pm

      “The fact remains there was no furthest (al-Aqsa) Mosque in Jerusalem in Mohammed’s lifetime. He could not visit what was NOT there at the time.”

      A mosque is not limited to a building, and includes places of worship and includes places of monotheistic worship. So the fact that there was no Muslim structure on the site is irrelevant.

      “In reality, a biographer of Mohammed”

      Who cares? The hadith which details the fact that it was al-Quds takes precedence.

      “One of them is: The Muslim claim to Jerusalem’s sacred spaces is a fraud.”

      Only to anti-Muslim bigots like you.

      “…but I would not disagree with an Israeli demolition of Al-Aqsa.”

      Amazing. It’s like someone cheering on Kristallnacht. Besides the fact that you would be kicking a billion people in the teeth and be directly responsible for the deaths of untold thousands of people that would result, you would be destroying an architectural gem and one of the great treasures of human civilization. One a barbarian without a shred of decency would even think this.

      • amigo
        amigo
        November 21, 2013, 11:51 am

        “A mosque is not limited to a building, and includes places of worship and includes places of monotheistic worship. So the fact that there was no Muslim structure on the site is irrelevant.” Woody Tanaka

        Quite so Woody.The British occupiers destroyed Irish Places of worship thereby forcing the churchgoers to find alternate places. Services were often carried out in a local field under trees.

      • eljay
        eljay
        November 21, 2013, 12:57 pm

        >> W.T.: A mosque is not limited to a building …

        According to this website about Islam, it is:

        A mosque is the building in which Muslims worship God. …

        Mosques come in all shapes and sizes; they differ from region to region based on the density of the Muslim population in a certain area. …

        There are however, certain features that are common to all mosques. Every mosque has a mihrab, a niche in the wall that indicates the direction of Mecca; the direction towards which Muslims pray. Most mosques have a minbar (or pulpit) from which an Islamic scholar is able to deliver a sermon or speech.

        Other common features include, minarets, tall towers used to call the congregation to prayer. Minarets are highly visible and are closely identified with mosques. Normally there is a large rectangular or square prayer area. It often takes the form of a flat roof supported by columns or a system of horizontal beams supported by architraves. In other common mosque designs, the roof consists of a single large dome on pendentives.[1] There are usually separate prayer areas, with separate entrances for both men and women.

        >> amigo: Quite so Woody.The British occupiers destroyed Irish Places of worship thereby forcing the churchgoers to find alternate places. Services were often carried out in a local field under trees.

        But those services and the congregations that attended them were not churches.

    • libra
      libra
      November 20, 2013, 7:27 pm

      Mike_Konrad: I can agree that Israel is sometimes unnecessarily harsh with the Palestinians…

      Indeed so Mike, but at least they haven’t shipped them all off to Argentina yet.

      Goodness knows what other madcap plans are gathering dust in the lost Konrad archive. I can only hope they stay buried in case some Israeli politician thinks ‘now there’s a good idea’.

    • talknic
      talknic
      November 20, 2013, 9:01 pm

      @ Mike_Konrad “The fact remains there was no furthest (al-Aqsa) Mosque in Jerusalem in Mohammed’s lifetime. He could not visit what was NOT there at the time”

      Irrelevant to the Internationally recognized proclaimed sovereign extent of the Jewish state

      “The Muslim claim to Jerusalem’s sacred spaces is a fraud”

      Go tell the UNSC (res 476).

      “I disagree with Israeli demolition of Palestinian houses; but I would not disagree with an Israeli demolition of Al-Aqsa”

      It’s not in Israel.

    • Walid
      Walid
      November 21, 2013, 12:13 am

      “The fact remains there was no furthest (al-Aqsa) Mosque in Jerusalem in Mohammed’s lifetime. He could not visit what was NOT there at the time…I disagree with Israeli demolition of Palestinian houses; but I would not disagree with an Israeli demolition of Al-Aqsa.” (Mike)

      I agree with your first statement that is based on historical fact but disagree with the second that is based on your vicious Zionistic sick and destructive mentality.

      On the other hand, provided Jews abide by Muslim house rules in effect at the Haram al-Sharif such as removal of footwear to enter the mosque, there is no reason to deny them the right to pray there. In 2001, Pope John Paul II removed his shoes when he and a group of Cardinals and Bishops entered the Umayyad mosque in Damascus. People of the Book, that includes Jews are recognized by the Quran and should therefore be allowed to pray in any structure that’s a house of God.

  8. mcohen
    mcohen
    November 20, 2013, 5:32 pm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Palestine_riots

    “In October 1928, the Grand Mufti organised new construction next to and above the Wall. Mules were driven through the praying area often dropping excrement, and waste water was thrown on Jews.”

    only 85 years ago,times sure are changing,i remember when coke cola cost 5 cents and a loaf of bread was 15 cents
    boy do I sure miss the good old days

    • Walid
      Walid
      November 21, 2013, 3:25 am

      ““In October 1928, the Grand Mufti organised new construction next to and above the Wall… (Wiki/mcohoen)

      From an essay on the subject of the wall:

      “The Jewish encyclopedia of 1917 states that the Wailing Wall became part of the Jewish religious traditions around 1520 AD, as a result of the Jewish immigration from Spain and after the Ottoman concur in 1517.

      During the British Mandate time, there was an increase on the visits of the Jews to the wall, so much it was alarming for the Muslims, and the Buraq revolt broke out on 23/8/1929 AD, when dozens of Muslim martyrs became casualties, as a large number of the Jews, too, were killed as well. The revolt expanded to include a number of the Palestinian cities, and resulted in the formation of an international commission entrusted to settle the issue of rights and claims of the Muslims and Jews to the Buraq Wall. The Commission was headed by the former Swedish Foreign Minister Alel Lufegrn, and with the membership of Charles Barde, Vice-President of the Court of Justice at Geneva. In 1930, following an investigation by the international commission and listening to the Muslem and Jewish claims, the commission submitted its report to the League of Nations stating the unquestioned Muslims’ right to the Buraq Wall…”

      http://www.a-taha.com/mutawakel/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=88:buraq-wall&catid=40:2011-12-27-10-14-41&Itemid=60

  9. just
    just
    November 21, 2013, 6:52 am

    This is an act of disrespect and provocation toward the Palestinians under Occupation and to Muslims everywhere. If Israel had ever been benevolent or interested in living with peace and justice, it would not be. Palestinians would be free to visit the other wall with respect and Israelis would be free to visit the esplanade with respect. I don’t think that the Israelis ever met a law/agreement/ban/ceasefire that they did not break.

    Because of Israeli aggression, disrespect, and their constant claiming/stealing/occupying that which is NOT theirs, it is clear that they are stoking the fire and probably would like nothing more than another intifada– where they can commit more genocide with their arsenals……….while blaming others who resent them because they “just wanted to pray”.

Leave a Reply